Connect with us

World

Increased Tax Credit Provides Welcome Relief to U.K. Independent Film Industry

Published

on

Increased Tax Credit Provides Welcome Relief to U.K. Independent Film Industry

The announcement of the U.K.’s new Independent Film Tax Credit (IFTC) back in March had a near instantaneous impact, at least in the case of one film production.

“Giant,” the biopic of boxer Naseem Hamed and starring Amir El-Masry, was in advanced pre-production when the news landed, with plans to shoot location work in Hamed’s home town of Sheffield and all the interiors — including the essential boxing rings — in Malta. Sets were already being built on the Mediterranean island, which has been courting numerous film productions in recent years thanks to a generous 40% tax rebate initiative.

But then the IFTC was unveiled and the U.K., when it came to producer’s all-important bottom line, was suddenly much more competitive. What had previously been a 20% tax break was now around 32.5% (it was initially billed as 40%, but is actually lower after corporation tax). Given the costs involved in shipping the film overseas, “Giant” didn’t need to pack up its bags.

“As soon as the tax credit came out, we did the analysis and immediately it made more economic sense, straight away, to keep it here,” explains Zygi Kamasa, the head of distributor and producer True Brit Entertainment. “So we pivoted within days of it coming through.”

“Giant” may have been the first, but just six months on from the announcement of the IFTC Kamasa says that it’s contributed enormously to the output of his nascent company — which was only launched in November 2023 with a focus on films for British cinemagoers. Where there was an initial aim to produce three films in its first year, True Brit will soon begin shooting its eighth. And while some — like “Giant” — would have happened regardless of the tax credit, he says “there were movies that were definitely expedited” because of it.

Advertisement

The significant interest and optimism within the British film industry since the IFTC’s announcement, despite not yet being fully implemented, is a far cry from the dark days of 2022. A report commissioned by the British Film Institute (BFI) that year had the key and ironic takeaway that the overall boom in the country’s film and high-end TV sector had led to a corresponding negative impact on the independent sector. It found that the speed and volume of growth strained the sector so much that it couldn’t compete with larger budget international productions on several levels — from accommodating the rising cost of production to securing cast and crew, and ultimately to reaching audiences.

BFI statistics reveal that getting U.K. films budgeted under £15 million ($19.6 million) into production had become increasingly challenging. After plummeting by 31% in 2022, spend on independent U.K. film in 2023 fell a further 11% to just £150 million ($196.9 million).

Now, in 2024, post IFTC announcement, Harriet Finney, BFI deputy CEO and director of corporate and industry affairs, says, “We’ve seen a lot of positivity in the industry. It’s definitely changed the conversation for independent filmmakers in this country.”

The BFI is currently preparing for increased capacity once the statutory instrument and guidance notes are published later this year. Finney explains, “We’re making sure that we’re in the best possible position to deal with what is likely to be a flurry of activity. It feels like there’s a growing sense of confidence around domestic production.”

Simon Williams, managing partner at Ashland Hill Media Finance, reports seeing an uptick in projects considering filming in the U.K. “We’re getting lots of different projects coming to us, asking if they should be shot in the U.K.,” Williams says. He notes that some international producers are exploring the possibility of adapting their scripts to meet U.K. requirements. “The U.K. looks more attractive for film currently, because the tax credit, it’s probably bigger than pretty much anywhere else in the world, aside from maybe Australia. But Australia is far away and it’s costly to take people over there,” Williams said.

Advertisement

However, Williams expresses concerns about potential cost increases. “We don’t want costs to increase by shooting in the U.K., which negates the benefit of the tax credit,” he cautions.

Ashland Hill-backed “The Magic Faraway Tree,” based on Enid Blyton’s beloved book, is currently in production. “The Scurry,” directed by Craig Roberts and starring Ella Purnell, Rhys Ifans and Antonia Thomas, has just finished shooting, which Ashland Hill funded against the increased tax credit. “That film would never have happened if it wasn’t for this increased tax credit. I think the only thing that may deter some lenders from putting money against it [is] if you are entering into a production now, you can’t put a claim in for your tax credit until April next year. Whereas in the current tax credit, you can make interim claims, which from a producer’s perspective, if you have a lender, you can make multiple claims and pay down the loan quicker, rather than doing one big claim in 18 months time,” Williams said.

Alex Ashworth, head of production at Anton, believes the IFTC will make a significant impact, particularly for films in the £5-15 million ($6.5-19.6 million) budget range. “I think it will really help independent film producers where we’ve lost that mid-budget section,” Ashworth says. “There was a long time where that was the U.K. sweet spot, films like ‘The King’s Speech,’ and I feel like the cost of production has gone up so that it’s very hard to make those at that level. Our incentives are good, but they aren’t necessarily comparable to some other territories. So by doing this, you’re offsetting basically the inflation that our production industry has experienced in the last five to seven years. I think it will really help those independent films who are probably struggling to get their finance plans to hit those higher budget levels.”

Ashworth estimates that Anton is currently working on four to five projects with the IFTC in mind for shooting in the next 12 to 18 months.

Producer Alastair Clark, whose recent film “Sister Midnight” premiered at Cannes, also sees the IFTC as a positive development for the industry. “The mood is great,” Clark says. He also points out that while the net benefit is around 32.5% after corporation tax, rather than the initially advertised 40%, it’s still a significant improvement over the previous system.

Advertisement

Clark is already incorporating the IFTC into his project planning. “Certainly, one very solid project right now that we’re raising the finance for. It’s a big part of it,” he says. Clark believes the increased tax credit will reduce the need for riskier private financing in some cases. “Borrowing against the tax credit versus borrowing against an MG (minimum guarantee) or a sales advance, is cheaper, and therefore helps finance plan a budget,” Clark said.

While the industry awaits full implementation of the IFTC, the initial response suggests it could play a crucial role in bolstering the U.K.’s independent film sector and positioning it far more attractively on the global stage. For Phil Hunt at Head Gear Films, it’s certainly a very positive move after the “nightmare of Brexit,” which he claims “ripped the heart out of indie co-productions.” The veteran producer says he’s already noticed that producers in North America are “definitely now looking to put more productions in the U.K. and, when talking to folk in LA, there seems to be a drain away from the U.S.”

But that’s not to say that execs are seeing IFTC at the perfect solution, of course. As with most newly-launched financial incentives, there are hopes that it will be tweaked and changed along the way, especially with the U.K. under a new Labour government that has, traditionally, been more supportive of the arts. An ideal situation for many is that the 40% rebate actually does mean a full 40% for producers.

“I’d love the government to look at that,” says Kamasa. “I think it should be the full 40%, because then you’d be truly competitive with places like Malta and Italy.”

HOW THE IFTC WORKS

Advertisement

The IFTC is calculated on “core expenditure” related to production activities, with qualifying companies able to claim up to 80% of their core expenditure or the amount of U.K. core expenditure, whichever is less. For a £15 million ($19.6 million) budget film, this could mean a maximum credit of £6.36 million before tax.

After corporation tax, which varies between 19% and 25%, the actual cash benefit could range from £4.77 million ($6.26 million) to £5.15 million ($6.76 million). This represents a substantial increase from the previous Audio-Visual Expenditure Credit (AVEC) system, which would have provided between £3.06 million ($4.01 million) and £3.30 million ($4.33 million) for the same budget.

The BFI will assess film budgets to ensure they meet the IFTC criteria. Productions that exceed the £15 million budget cap during filming will have the option to continue with the IFTC or switch to the AVEC system.

Claims for the IFTC can be submitted to HMRC (His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs) from April 1, 2025, for expenditure incurred from April 1, 2024, provided principal photography began after April 1, 2024.

Advertisement

World

See Where U.S. Sites Have Been Damaged in War With Iran

Published

on

See Where U.S. Sites Have Been Damaged in War With Iran

U.S. installations damaged in strikes

Advertisement

Note: Some sites shown were claimed to have been struck by Iran-aligned militias. Data are as of March 10. The New York Times

Advertisement

Iran has responded to the U.S.-Israeli assault on the country by launching drones and missiles at American targets across the Middle East, hitting embassies, killing U.S. soldiers, and damaging military bases and air defense infrastructure.

The New York Times has identified at least 17 damaged U.S. sites and other installations, several of which have been struck more than once since the war began. Our analysis is based on high-resolution, commercial satellite imagery, verified social media videos and statements by U.S. officials and Iranian state media.

The intensity of the retaliatory strikes has signaled that Iran was more prepared for the war than many in the Trump administration had anticipated, U.S. military officials say.

Advertisement

For this article, we are presenting satellite images to show the scale of the damage from Iran’s attacks on U.S. sites and installations. Many of these images have been circulating publicly on news sites and social media. But in cases where they have not been, we present the imagery we obtained from satellite image companies and show only a zoomed-out view of each location to limit the amount of detail viewable in those images.

Military sites

Advertisement

Iran has fired thousands of missiles and drones at both U.S. and allied country military sites across the region. The United States and its allies have intercepted most of them, U.S. officials say, but at least 11 American military bases or installations have been damaged — nearly half of all such sites in the region.

On Feb. 28, the first day of conflict, Iran targeted several U.S. military facilities, including Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia; Ali Al Salem Air Base and Camp Buehring Base in Kuwait; and Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest U.S. base in the Middle East.

Satellite images show extensive damage to buildings and communication infrastructure at several locations.

Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement

Ali Al Salem, Kuwait
March 1

Advertisement

Camp Arifjan, Kuwait
March 4

Advertisement

Shuaiba port, Kuwait
March 2

Advertisement

Camp Buehring, Kuwait
March 5

Advertisement

Advertisement

U.S. Navy 5th Fleet HQ, Bahrain
March 1

Advertisement

Prince Sultan, Saudi Arabia
March 1

Advertisement

Jebel Ali port, U.A.E.
March 1

Advertisement

Muwaffaq Salti, Jordan
March 4

Advertisement

Erbil Airport, Iraq
March 1

Advertisement

Satellite images by Airbus DS and Planet Labs.

A video taken on March 1 shows an Iranian drone exploding near sports facilities at Camp Buehring in Kuwait. No casualties were reported.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Camp Buehring, Kuwait
March 1

It is difficult to estimate the full cost of damage inflicted by Iran’s retaliatory strikes. A Pentagon assessment provided to Congress last week put the cost of the single strike on the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain on Feb. 28 at about $200 million, according to a congressional official.

On March 1, an Iranian drone struck a structure housing military personnel at the Shuaiba port in Kuwait, killing six American service members.

Advertisement

Satellite imagery shows the roof of that building partially collapsed.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Shuaiba port
June 26, 2025

Advertisement

Satellite images by Planet Labs.

An additional U.S. service member was killed in a separate Iranian strike on March 1 at a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia, bringing the toll to seven, the Pentagon said on Sunday.

Advertisement

The pace of Iranian attacks has slowed since the war’s opening days, but the strikes have continued. Al Udeid Air Base, Ali Al Salem Air Base, Al Dhafra Air Base, Camp Buehring and the Navy’s Fifth Fleet headquarters have all been struck more than once.

Missiles launched from Iran have flown as far away as Turkey. On March 4, NATO intercepted an Iranian ballistic missile headed toward Incirlik Air Base in Turkey, according to a senior U.S. military official. The base hosts a large U.S. Air Force contingent. Iran’s military denied firing the missile.

A second Iranian missile entered Turkish airspace and was shot down by NATO, according to a Turkish defense ministry statement on Monday.

Advertisement

Air defense and communication infrastructure

Among the costliest American losses to infrastructure have been to the air defense systems that protect U.S. and allied interests across the Middle East.

Advertisement

Iran has systematically targeted radar and communications systems, including components of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, known as THAAD, which uses a radar to track and intercept incoming aerial threats throughout the region.

At Muwaffaq Salti Air Base, an important hub for the U.S. Air Force in Jordan, satellite imagery from February shows radar equipment at the base’s southern edge. An image taken two days after the war began shows severe damage to what appears to be an air defense sensor.

Military budget and contract documents indicate a single radar unit of this type can cost up to half a billion dollars.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Muwaffaq Salti, Jordan
March 2

Satellite image by Airbus DS.

Advertisement

A video from Feb. 28 shows an Iranian drone striking the headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Manama, Bahrain, damaging what appears to be a communications radome, a weatherproof cover that protects radar and communication equipment.

Gulf nations have also bought air defense equipment from American companies and deployed them near critical infrastructure, including oil refineries. Those foreign radar systems share information with the U.S. military, forming what defense analysts describe as a de facto, expanded U.S. military sensor network.

Advertisement

Iran has targeted such sites where air defense equipment was recently observed, like the Al Ruwais facility in the United Arab Emirates. Satellite imagery of the site from last year shows a THAAD unit near storage structures.

A satellite image taken after Iranian attacks shows significant damage to the storage structures. The Times was unable to verify whether the mobile THAAD unit was inside the storage structures at the time of the strikes.

Near Umm Dahal in Qatar, a long range AN/FPS-132 radar — built at a cost of $1.1 billion to provide early warning coverage across a 3,000 mile radius — apparently sustained damage to its main radar structure, as seen in satellite imagery.

Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Umm Dahal, Qatar
Feb. 3, 2025

Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Al Ruwais, U.A.E.
Aug. 13, 2025

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Al Sader, U.A.E.
Oct.. 22, 2025

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Al Sader, U.A.E.
Oct. 22, 2025

Advertisement

Satellite images by Airbus DS and Planet Labs.

The full extent of damage to U.S. air defense and communication infrastructure remains unclear. Michael Eisenstadt, a director at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that the affected radars would be difficult to repair or replace.

Advertisement

But Seth G. Jones, a president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that the damage would most likely not significantly degrade U.S. military capabilities in this war. “The U.S. has such redundancy in collecting intelligence and other information from sensor networks, whether it’s land-based radars, aircrafts or space-based systems,” he said.

Diplomatic sites

Iran has also struck nonmilitary U.S. targets such as the consulate in Dubai, and embassies in Kuwait City, Kuwait, and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, forcing temporary closures. There have been no reported injuries in any of these attacks.

Advertisement

On Saturday night, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was targeted in a rocket attack. No casualties were reported. It was not immediately clear who was behind it and how much damage was caused. It is not included in The Times’s tally of damaged sites.

Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander of the U.S. Central Command, said on March 7 that Iranian ballistic missile attacks had dropped 90 percent since the first day of the conflict and drone attacks by 83 percent. Despite the declining pace, Iran has continued to strike American targets across the region.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Rubio designates Afghanistan as ‘state sponsor of wrongful detention’: ‘Despicable tactics’

Published

on

Rubio designates Afghanistan as ‘state sponsor of wrongful detention’: ‘Despicable tactics’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated Afghanistan as a “state sponsor of wrongful detention,” accusing the Taliban of “unjustly” detaining Americans and other foreign nationals.

In his announcement on Monday, Rubio said the Taliban continues to use “terrorist tactics” that he insisted “need to end.”

“I am designating Afghanistan as a State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention,” Rubio said in a statement. “The Taliban continues to use terrorist tactics, kidnapping individuals for ransom or to seek policy concessions. These despicable tactics need to end.”

The secretary also called on the terror group to free a pair of Americans who are “unjustly detained” in Afghanistan.

Advertisement

IRAN REGIME CITED AS TRUMP ADMIN SET TO DESIGNATE SUDAN’S MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD A TERROR GROUP

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio designated Afghanistan as a “state sponsor of wrongful detention.” (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“It is not safe for Americans to travel to Afghanistan because the Taliban continues to unjustly detain our fellow Americans and other foreign nationals,” he said. “The Taliban needs to release Dennis Coyle, Mahmoud Habibi, and all Americans unjustly detained in Afghanistan now and commit to cease the practice of hostage diplomacy forever.”

Coyle, 64, was detained more than a year ago without charges by the Taliban General Directorate of Intelligence, according to his family, noting that he still has not been charged. His family said he was legally working to support Afghan language communities as an academic researcher.

Habibi, a 38-year-old American citizen who was born in Afghanistan, was taken along with his driver from their vehicle in the capital of Kabul in August 2022 by the Taliban General Directorate of Intelligence, according to the State Department.

Advertisement

The FBI said Habibi was previously Afghanistan’s director of civil aviation and worked for the Kabul-based telecommunications company Asia Consultancy Group. The FBI said the Taliban detained 29 other employees of the company but has released most of them.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the Taliban continues to use “terrorist tactics” that he insisted “need to end.” (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

Habibi has not been heard from since his arrest, and the Taliban has not disclosed his whereabouts or condition, according to the State Department and FBI. The Taliban has previously denied it detained Habibi.

The U.S. is also calling for the return of the remains of Paul Overby, an author who was last seen close to Afghanistan’s border with Pakistan in 2014, according to Reuters, citing two sources familiar with the situation.

The State Department could restrict the use of U.S. passports for travel to Afghanistan if the Taliban does not meet the U.S. government’s demands, the sources told the outlet.

Advertisement

A passport restriction of this kind is currently only in place for North Korea.

The Taliban called the decision by Rubio to designate Afghanistan a “state sponsor of wrongful detention” regrettable, adding that it wanted to resolve the matter through dialogue.

STATE DEPARTMENT DEFENDS ‘PROACTIVE’ EVACUATION EFFORTS AGAINST DEMS’ CLAIMS OF DIPLOMATIC CHAOS

The Taliban called the decision to designate Afghanistan a “state sponsor of wrongful detention” regrettable. (Reuters/Ali Khara)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The Taliban took control of Afghanistan in 2021 during the U.S. military’s chaotic withdrawal from the country that ended the 20-year war in the region.

Rubio gave the “state sponsor of wrongful detention” designation to Iran late last month, just one day before the U.S.-Israeli strikes on the country. He warned that the U.S. could restrict travel to Iran over its detention of U.S. citizens, but there have not been any restrictions yet.

“The Iranian regime must stop taking hostages and release all Americans unjustly detained in Iran, steps that could end this designation and associated actions,” Rubio said at the time.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Von der Leyen ‘acting outside of competence,’ Araud tells Euronews

Published

on

Von der Leyen ‘acting outside of competence,’ Araud tells Euronews

Gérard Araud, the highly connected former French ambassador to the United States, said Ursula von der Leyn is exceeding the powers of her mandate by tapping into foreign policy while pushing a German-like approach in an interview with Euronews.

ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

From Ukraine peace negotiations to the ongoing war in Iran, von der Leyen has managed to grow her role closer to that of a head of state in a move not without controversy.

Von der Leyen was the first EU official to call for a political transition in Iran in line with the goals of the United States and Israel, who have openly called for regime change in Tehran, and have urged the bloc to seek a more pragmatic approach to foreign policy.

“She’s [acting outside of] her competence,” Araud said on Euronews’ interview programme 12 Minutes With on Tuesday, a day after von der Leyen addressed a conference of EU ambassadors in which she declared the world order conceived after the Second World War to be over and never to return.

Advertisement

**”**The Treaties of the European Union, which is the basis of the EU, do not give her any special competence in foreign policy,” he added, calling her remarks “surprising.”

In the same conference, von der Leyen made headlines in Brussels after she suggested the EU would always defend the rules-based system, but it can “no longer be a custodian of the old-world order” or assume its rules will shelter Europe in the future.

Araud said her comments are problematic as the EU seeks to cement new partnerships across the world by presenting itself as the last bastion of international rules and respect for fundamental values in a brutal, increasingly chaotic world.

“Europeans are the last flag bearers of international law,” he said. “It’s a bit like someone committing adultery while saying ‘I am in favour of the principles of marital fidelity’.’

In 2019, as von der Leyen assumed her first mandate, she vowed to make the European Commission a geopolitical actor. But her power moves into foreign policy have not gone unnoticed across European capitals, with relations with Israel becoming a point of tension between EU member states, seen as supportive, critics and the Commission.

Advertisement

Her complicated relationship with Kaja Kallas, the European foreign policy chief and EU High Representative, has also led to a cacophony of views when it comes to foreign policy, an area where the EU historically struggles to unite 27 voices.

Her positioning since the start of the war in Iran “is not in line with Spain, and it’s not in line with France, it’s a German line,” Araud said.

Araud, who made a name for himself in European diplomatic circles after a stint as French ambassador in the US from 2014 to 2019, said Trump has miscalculated the ramifications of attacking Iran, which he described as far more complicated than Venezuela, where the US was easily able to swap the leadership to a more friendly one.

“What is the goal of this operation? At the beginning, it was regime change, then it was the nuclear programme, and now it’s a question of destroying the Iranian military apparatus,” Araud said. “He thought he would encounter a situation closer to Venezuela, but that hasn’t worked…Iran has made the choice of waiting.”

The former French ambassador to Israel said he also worries Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has “dragged the US” into a war without a clear plan and cautioned that Israel will not stop in its main objective of becoming the main player in the region, even if that means another round of military escalation and broader conflict in the region.

Advertisement

“There is a trauma after October 7th. For Israel, it cannot go back to the (scenario) that existed before that, and now it is about a new regime in the Middle East. Until now, they have been successful. But the biggest obstacle remains Iran.”

Asked how the war could end, he said Trump could play the TACO card — an acronym for Trump Always Chickens Out — which could see the US President declaring victory and settling for a half-cooked resolution. Still, Araud said he does not believe Israel will leave its objectives incomplete when it comes to Iran. “I don’t think they will stop,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending